PowerPoint KILLS Effective Teacher and Student Presentations
Spiro Bolos, New Trier High School
PowerPoint KILLS
?
“Imagine a widely used and expensive prescription drug that claimed to make us beautiful but didn’t. Instead the drug had frequent, serious side effects: making us stupid, degrading the quality and credibility of our communication, turning us into bores, wasting our colleagues’ time. The side effects, and the resulting unsatisfactory cost/ benefit ratio, would rightly lead to a worldwide product recall.” — Edward Tufte, The Cognitive Style of PowerPoint
COLUMBIA
ACCIDENT INVESTIGATION BOARD
ENGINEERING
BY
The Debris Assessment Team presented its analysis in a formal briefing to the Mission Evaluation Room that relied on PowerPoint slides from Boeing. When engineering analyses and risk assessments are condensed to fit on a standard form or overhead slide, information is inevitably lost. In the process, the priority assigned to information can be easily misrepresented by its placement on a chart and the language that is used. Dr. Edward Tufte of Yale University, an expert in information presentation who also researched communications failures in the Challenger accident, studied how the slides used by the Debris Assessment Team in their briefing to the Mission Evaluation Room misrepresented key information.38
VIEWGRAPHS Tufte also criticized the sloppy language on the slide. “The vaguely quantitative words ‘significant’ and ‘significantly’ are used 5 times on this slide,” he notes, “with de facto meanings ranging from ‘detectable in largely irrelevant calibration case study’ to ‘an amount of damage so that everyone dies’ to ‘a difference of 640-fold.’ ” 40 Another example of sloppiness is that “cubic inches” is written inconsistently: “3cu. In,” “1920cu in,” and “3 cu in.” While such inconsistencies might seem minor, in highly technical fields like aerospace engineering a misplaced decimal point or mistaken unit of measurement can easily engender inconsistencies and inaccuracies. In another phrase “Test results do show that it is possible at sufficient mass and velocity,” the word “it” actually refers to “damage to the protective tiles.”
The slide created six levels of hierarchy, signified by the title and the symbols to the left of each line. These levels prioritized information that was already contained in 11 simple sentences. Tufte also notes that the title is confusing. “Review of Test Data Indicates Conservatism” refers not to the predicted tile damage, but to the choice of test models used to predict the damage.
As information gets passed up an organization hierarchy, from people who do analysis to mid-level managers to high-level leadership, key explanations and supporting information is filtered out. In this context, it is easy to understand how a senior manager might read this PowerPoint slide and not realize that it addresses a life-threatening situation.
Only at the bottom of the slide do engineers state a key piece of information: that one estimate of the debris that struck Columbia was 640 times larger than the data used to calibrate the model on which engineers based their damage assessments. (Later analysis showed that the debris object was actually 400 times larger). This difference led Tufte to suggest that a more appropriate headline would be “Review of Test Data Indicates Irrelevance of Two Models.” 39
At many points during its investigation, the Board was surprised to receive similar presentation slides from NASA officials in place of technical reports. The Board views the endemic use of PowerPoint briefing slides instead of technical papers as an illustration of the problematic methods of technical communication at NASA. The vaguely quantitative words "significant" and "significantly" are used 5 times on this slide, with de facto meanings ranging from "detectable in largely irrelevant calibration case study" to "an amount of damage so that everyone dies" to "a difference of 640-fold." None of these 5 usages appears to refer to the technical meaning of "statistical significance."
Review Of Test Data Indicates Conservatism for Tile Penetration
•
The existing SOFI on tile test data used to create Crater was reviewed along with STS-107 Southwest Research data – Crater overpredicted penetration of tile coating significantly • Initial penetration to described by normal velocity Varies with volume/mass of projectile(e.g., 200ft/sec for 3cu. In) • Significant energy is required for the softer SOFI particle to penetrate the relatively hard tile coating Test results do show that it is possible at sufficient mass and velocity • Conversely, once tile is penetrated SOFI can cause significant damage Minor variations in total energy (above penetration level) can cause significant tile damage
– Flight condition is significantly outside of test database • Volume of ramp is 1920cu in vs 3 cu in for test 2/21/03
6
The low resolution of PowerPoint slides promotes the use of compressed phrases like "Tile Penetration." As is the case here, such phrases may well be ambiquous. (The low resolution and large font generate 3 typographic orphans, lonely words dangling on a seperate line.)
This vague pronoun reference "it" alludes to damage to the protective tiles,which caused the destruction of the Columbia. The slide weakens important material with ambiquous language (sentence fragments, passive voice, multiple meanings of "significant"). The 3 reports were created by engineers for high-level NASA officials who were deciding whether the threat of wing damage required further investigation before the Columbia attempted return. The officials were satisfied that the reports indicated that the Columbia was not in danger, and no attempts to further examine the threat were made. The slides were part of an oral presentation and also were circulated as e-mail attachments. In this slide the same unit of measure for volume (cubic inches) is shown a different way every time 3cu. in 1920cu. in 3 cu. in rather than in clear and tidy exponential form 1920 in 3 . Perhaps the available font cannot show exponents. Shakiness in units of measurement provokes concern. Slides that use hierarchical bullet-outlines here do not handle statistical data and scientific notation gracefully. If PowerPoint is a corporate-mandated format for all engineering reports, then some competent scientific typography (rather than the PP market-pitch style) is essential. In this slide, the typography is so choppy and clunky that it impedes understanding.
The analysis by Dr. Edward Tufte of the slide from the Debris Assessment Team briefing. [SOFI=Spray-On Foam Insulation]
Report Volume I
August 2003
191
The vaguely quantitative words "significant" and "significantly" are used 5 times on this slide, with de facto meanings ranging from "detectable in largely irrelevant calibration case study" to "an amount of damage so that everyone dies" to "a difference of 640-fold." None of these 5 usages appears to refer to the technical meaning of "statistical significance."
Review Of Test Data Indicates Conservatism for Tile Penetration
•
The existing SOFI on tile test data used to create Crater was reviewed along with STS-107 Southwest Research data – Crater overpredicted penetration of tile coating significantly • Initial penetration to described by normal velocity Varies with volume/mass of projectile(e.g., 200ft/sec for 3cu. In) • Significant energy is required for the softer SOFI particle to penetrate the relatively hard tile coating Test results do show that it is possible at sufficient mass and velocity • Conversely, once tile is penetrated SOFI can cause significant damage Minor variations in total energy (above penetration level) can cause significant tile damage
– Flight condition is significantly outside of test database • Volume of ramp is 1920cu in vs 3 cu in for test 2/21/03
6
The low resolution of PowerPoint slides promotes the use of compressed phrases like "Tile Penetration." As is the case here, such phrases may well be ambiquous. (The low resolution and large font generate 3 typographic orphans, lonely words dangling on a seperate line.)
This vague pronoun reference "it" alludes to damage to the protective tiles,which caused the destruction of the Columbia. The slide weakens important material with ambiquous language (sentence fragments, passive voice, multiple meanings of "significant"). The 3 reports were created by engineers for high-level NASA officials who were deciding whether the threat of wing damage required further investigation before the Columbia attempted return. The officials were satisfied that the reports indicated that the Columbia was not in danger, and no attempts to further examine the threat were made. The slides were part of an oral presentation and also were circulated as e-mail attachments. In this slide the same unit of measure for volume (cubic inches) is shown a different way every time 3cu. in 1920cu. in 3 cu. in rather than in clear and tidy exponential form 1920 in 3 . Perhaps the available font cannot show exponents. Shakiness in units of measurement provokes concern. Slides that use hierarchical bullet-outlines here do not handle statistical data and scientific notation gracefully. If PowerPoint is a corporate-mandated format for all engineering reports, then some competent scientific typography (rather than the PP market-pitch style) is essential. In this slide, the typography is so choppy and clunky that it impedes understanding.
The analysis by Dr. Edward Tufte of the slide from the Debris Assessment Team briefing. [SOFI=Spray-On Foam Insulation]
meaning calibrati everyone these 5 u of "statis
Review Of Test Data Indicates Conservatism for Tile Penetration
“In the reports, every single text-slide The existing SOFI on tile test data used 4 to create Crater bullet-outlines with to 6 levels •uses was reviewed along with STS-107 Southwest Research data – Crater overpredicted penetration of tile coating of hierarchy. significantly Then another multi-level list, another bureaucracy of bullets, starts afresh for a new slide. • Initial penetration to described by normal velocity Varies with volume/mass of projectile(e.g., 200ft/sec for 3cu. In) • Significant energy is required for the softer SOFI particle to penetrate the relatively hard tile coating Test results do show that it is possible at sufficient mass and velocity • Conversely, once tile is penetrated SOFI can cause significant damage Minor variations in total energy (above penetration level) can cause significant tile damage
How is it that each elaborate – Flight condition is significantly outside of test database architecture of thought always fits exactly on one slide?” • Volume of ramp is 1920cu in vs 3 cu in for test 2/21/03
6
The low the use o As is the (The low orphans,
This vag to the pr Columbi ambiquo multiple were cre who wer required attempte reports i and no a made. T also wer
In this sl (cubic in
rather th
“Life After Death By PPT”
“Particularly disturbing is the adoption of the PowerPoint cognitive style in our schools. Rather than learning to write a report using sentences, children are being taught how to formulate client pitches and infomercials.” — Edward Tufte, “PowerPoint is Evil”
RESEARCH
dual-channels
“Multimedia Principle”
“Contiguity Principle”
“Coherence Principle”
(cognitive load)
versus
“[I]n designing a PowerPoint slide it is important to not present an overwhelming amount of information (i.e., coherence principle) and it is useful to have simple graphics to supplement words (i.e., multimedia principle).�
“Personalization Principle”
EXEMPLARS
The “Lessig Method”
www.ted.com
GUIDES
http://www.slideshare.net/RowanManahan/dodging-bullets-in-presentations
http://www.slideshare.net/RowanManahan/dodging-bullets-in-presentations
http://www.slideshare.net/RowanManahan/dodging-bullets-in-presentations
http://www.slideshare.net/RowanManahan/dodging-bullets-in-presentations
http://www.slideshare.net/RowanManahan/dodging-bullets-in-presentations
http://www.slideshare.net/RowanManahan/dodging-bullets-in-presentations
danger, alert fave trust
renewal
SOURCES
flickrSTORM http://www.zoo-m.com/flickr-storm/
AFTERWARDS
“Studies by...Mayer et al. (2003) showed beneficial effects of giving learners control over the pacing of their multimedia instructions in terms of learning results” (346). The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning — Richard E. Mayer
“PowerPoint is a competent slide manager and projector. But rather than supplementing a presentation, it has become a substitute for it. Such misuse ignores the most important rule of speaking: Respect your audience.” — Edward Tufte, “PowerPoint is Evil”
Q &A
• PowerPoint icon: http://en.wikipedia.org/
wiki/File:Powerpoint_mac_2008_icon.png
• Dr. Richard Mayer: http://
www.psych.ucsb.edu/people/faculty/mayer/ index.php
• The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning by Richard E. Mayer
• Bill Gates: http://www.flickr.com/photos/ worldeconomicforum/350245689/
• Interview with Richard Mayer: http:// www.sociablemedia.com/ articles_mayer.htm
• Edward Tufte, “PowerPoint is Evil”: http:// www.wired.com/wired/archive/11.09/ ppt2.html
• Columbia shuttle debris: http://
history.nasa.gov/columbia/debris_pics.html
• Sunset: http://www.flickr.com/photos/ wavy1/2303062662/
• Columbia launch: http://grin.hq.nasa.gov/ BROWSE/columbia_1.html
• Richard E. Mayer: http://www.udel.edu/PR/ UDaily/2008/jul/Mayerlg.jpg
• The Cognitive Style of PowerPoint: http://
www.edwardtufte.com/tufte/powerpoint
• “Entering Hyperspace”: http://
www.flickr.com/photos/eole/380316678/
• Sports Designer of the Year: http:// www.sportsdesigner.com/ 1/2007/02/2006_sports_des.html
• 2 computers image: http://www.flickr.com/ photos/timsamoff/144022496/
• Limited capacity image: http://
www.flickr.com/photos/fotex/217896072/
• Steve Jobs: http://www.flickr.com/photos/ acaben/541334636/
• Lawrence Lessig: http://www.flickr.com/ photos/joi/2115184003/
• “Dodging Bullets in Presentations”: http:// www.slideshare.net/RowanManahan/ dodging-bullets-in-presentations
• “Our Direction”: http://www.flickr.com/ photos/b-tal/116220689/
• One Hour PPT: http://jakes.editme.com/ onehourppt
• “Sources”: http://www.flickr.com/photos/ theklan/527782553/
• An Introduction to FlickrStorm: http://
www.teachertube.com/view_video.php? viewkey=6fa63738371ec0d5df81
• Ear: http://www.flickr.com/photos/ lintmachine/2251514423/
• Eye: http://www.flickr.com/photos/ simonpais/59039141/